Session 420

Relational Mechanisms and Governance Choice in Alliances

Track N

Date: Monday, September 22, 2014


Time: 08:00 – 09:15


Room: Helsinki

Session Chair:

  • Deepak Somaya, University of Illinois at Urbana-Champaign

Title: Government Architectural Knowledge and Agglomeration: A Study of Chinese Township


  • Sali Li, University of South Carolina
  • Stephen B Tallman, University of Richmond
  • Liangding Jia, Nanjing University

Abstract: Regional clusters have become popular constructs for organizing economic activity geographically and have also become popular concepts with which to structure governmental economic policy. This study examines the role of government architectural knowledge in cluster heterogeneity. We extend the knowledge based view (KBV) to argue that government architectural knowledge helps provide an idiosyncratic platform for firms in the cluster to interact and exchange knowledge. We assess government architectural knowledge along the dimensions of the mixture of ties and the diversity of functionality, and propose that these attributes of government architectural knowledge will affect cluster comparative performance against its focal industry. In addition, the relationship between government architectural knowledge and cluster performance will be moderated by the industry structure of a cluster. We intend to empirically investigate our hypotheses in the context of Chinese township cluster.

Title: Managing the Post-Divorce Crisis of Strategic Alliances


  • Ali Kazeminia, ESADE Business School
  • Africa Ariño, IESE Business School
  • Cristina Gimenez, ESADE Business School
  • Mohammad Hosein Rezazade Mehrizi, VU University Amsterdam, KIN research group

Abstract: One very probable result of any alliance is a failure-driven crisis followed by a dissolved alliance (Gulati et al., 2008). Drawing on both the motion theory of classical physics and the concept of resources, we provide a theoretical approach to a failed party’s behavior related to an unexpectedly terminated alliance. We discuss two main forces, both of which contribute to the failed party’s survival: (1) moving inertia; and (2) new moving forces. We primarily discuss the fact that resources with moving inertia will help a failed party to keep its business operating at a minimum level while also helping to create new moving forces to overcome the crisis. In addition, we discuss the change speed of resources as an underlying factor that helps managers to realize those resources that either: (1) have moving inertia; or (2) can be used to create new moving forces.

Title: Relational Advantage and Partner-Driven Corporate Scope: The Case for Client-Led Diversification


  • John Mawdsley, HEC-Paris
  • Deepak Somaya, University of Illinois at Urbana-Champaign

Abstract: Prior research on the relational view provides considerable insights into the advantages of relational assets and relational strategies for inter-firm coordination and firm-level performance. We extend the relational view by theorizing how and when relational assets may be leveraged into new lines of business and lead to corporate diversification. Our theory suggests that new business opportunities stemming from existing clients’ diversification may lead suppliers to diversify into new areas, and that this effect is strengthened by buyer-supplier relational assets (buyer-specific knowledge and relational governance) and weakened by suppliers’ pursuit of capabilities based on other types of knowledge such as industry or occupational expertise. We test these propositions using detailed longitudinal data on patent prosecution work outsourced between patent law firms (suppliers) and their corporate clients.

Title: Trustworthiness through Corporate Social Responsibility: Partner Selection in Strategic Alliances


  • Husain Ali, Rensselaer Polytechnic Institute
  • Bill Francis, Rensselaer Polytechnic Institute

Abstract: The literature on trust in strategic alliances is vast, but its role in alliance formation is almost nonexistent. Pointing to the difficulties of operationalizing this construct, scholars mostly employ survey to measure trust. Using Williamson’s TCE as well as Akerlof’s “lemons” problem, we postulate that firms can use trust as a mechanism to identify themselves as non-opportunistic partners thereby, facilitating alliance formation. Drawing from the CSR literature, and using positive CSR activities as an indication of firms’ trustworthiness we find strong support for the ex-ante importance of trust in alliance formation. We also find that stakeholder awareness of firms’ trustworthiness affects the relationship between firm’s trustworthiness and alliance formation. Finally, we also find that alliance experience has a moderating impact.

All Sessions in Track N...

Sun: 08:00 – 09:15
Session 408: Future Research Directions in Cooperative Strategy
Sun: 11:15 – 12:30
Session 427: Research Methods in Cooperative Strategy
Sun: 15:45 – 17:00
Session 422: Alliance Formation and Stakeholder Perceptions
Sun: 17:15 – 18:30
Session 610: Cooperative Strategies IG Business Meeting
Mon: 08:00 – 09:15
Session 418: The Structure and Evolution of Networks
Session 420: Relational Mechanisms and Governance Choice in Alliances
Mon: 11:00 – 12:15
Session 416: Resource Dependence, Power Relations and Cooperation
Session 423: Alliances and Innovation Performance
Mon: 14:45 – 16:00
Session 424: Partnering Experience, Alliance Governance, and Performance
Session 425: Tradeoffs and Opportunism in Cooperative Relations
Mon: 16:30 – 17:45
Session 419: Cognition and Learning in Alliances
Tue: 08:00 – 09:15
Session 409: Increasing the Relevance of Strategy Research
Session 417: Networks of Competition and Cooperation
Tue: 15:30 – 16:45
Session 421: Acquisitions, Alliances, and Contracts
Tue: 17:15 – 18:30
Session 454: Multipartner Cooperation and Third-Party Relations

Strategic Management Society